Apple claims that the iPad 3 is "four times faster than Tegra 3"... does that claim hold up?

Apple, Inc. (AAPL), as usual, astounded the world with its latest product launch. The company who made tablets a hot commodity a week ago pulled the wraps off its third generation tablet. Featuring a high-definition "Retina" screen from LG Electronics Inc. (KS:066570) and an LTE modem, the new tablet kicked off a crazed frenzy of pre-orders.

I. Same Results, Different CPU

Apple now has stated it will be out of stock of the popular tablet for several weeks, following the sales of its small-quantity of in-store stock. So what are buyers getting? Well the first benchmarks have leaked out from Vietnamese forums site Tinhte.vn, and, if accurate, the picture is not as rosy as some fans had hoped.

Using the Benchmark from GeekBench that measures integer, floating point performance, stream processing, and memory, the tester reveals that the computing power on the unspecified 1.0 GHz ARMv7 instruction set purported A5X dual-core CPU remains unchanged.

[Source: Tienhte]

II. Better Graphics

The results would hint that when Apple said that its system-on-a-chip was "four times faster than Tegra 3", it was referring to the graphics processing unit, not the ARM central-processing unit. The GPU core is expected to be a quad-core variant of Kings Langley, UK-based Imagination Technologies Plc's (LON:IMG) PowerVR SGX543MP2, dubbed the SGX543MP4.

The SGX543MP4 is expected to pack a theoretical 134 MPolygon/s and 4 GPixel/s fill rate. AnandTech's benchmarking of the iPad 2 vs. NVIDIA Corp.'s (NVDA) Tegra in GPU-centric GLBenchmark showed the last generation iPad to be anywhere from 30 to 80 percent faster than Tegra 3 in different benchmarks, versus Apple's claim that it was twice as fast. Thus it could be expected that the new core in some cases would be 2x as fast as Tegra 3, or perhaps a bit better.

Given that Tegra 3 has a higher clock, perhaps it would be fair to say that to some extent in clock-per-clock Apple's GPU could be close to legitimately delivering 4x performance speed-up vs. Tegra 3, which is quite impressive (but again, the credit here goes first to Imagination Technologies for making the GPU, and second to Apple for securing the stock).

Tegra 4 will pack a significantly increased core count and faster clock speeds, but NVIDIA hopes to keep power consumption and die size low, thanks to the die shrink and new circuit technologies.

A modified Tegra 4, code-named "Grey", after the iconic Jean Grey of X-Men fame, is packing an on-die 4G LTE radio from Icera Inc. The shipping date has been accelerated to an earlier 2012 release, but is unclear whether designs sporting the chips will appear in time for the holidays.

"Grey" will be followed by a chip code-named after her at times flame "Logan" (aka "Wolverine"). Logan will pack a greatly improved GPU, and will launch in 2013.

If not, Apple's main competition will likely be the Qualcomm, Inc.'s (QCOM) Snapdragon 4, which is expected to see deep pickup in the smartphone and tablet space, as well as in Windows 8 laptops. Qualcomm is a close ally of Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) who recorded it by making it the exclusive CPU supplier of the Windows Phone platform at launch.

The Qualcomm CPU may prove a threat to Apple's tablet dominance as AnandTech’s described its performance as "insane".

IV. Samsung Truce Could Guarantee Steady Component Supply for iPad 3

AnandTech has published some additional info on the CPU, stating that it's Cortex-A9 MPCore, which indicates that Apple may have purchased an IP core from ARM Technologies Plc. (LON:ARM) and then modified it. Our sources had previously hinted that the iPad 3 might carry Apple's first in-house designed CPU, but this claim has been difficult to verify due to Apple's extreme secrecy.

Regardless, both AnandTech’s analysis, the GeekBench metrics, and our own sources indicate that while the CPU may be an advance for Apple in terms of internalizing its design, it is hardly a step forward -- let alone a leap forward -- in terms of performance.

The GeekBench benchmark did confirm (as previously leaked by mobile engine developer Epic Games during its iPad 3-related press comments) that the new iPad 3 has 1 GB of RAM -- twice the memory of its predecessor. That should help keep those hungry graphics GPU cores (which use the DRAM for slow-storage) fed.

The core -- like the last generation model -- is expected to be printed by Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KS:005930) at its Texas facility, a mere miles away from one of Apple's top call centers. Samsung -- reportedly the sole remaining profitable DRAM supplier -- is also expected to supply the design and process of the on-die DDR2 RAM (memory).

According to AnandTech’s math, the iPad 3 would last a mere 6 hours with a 25 watt-hour battery, based on the fact that Apple claims 10 hours of battery life on the new 42.5 watt-hour battery. The new Apple tablet adds several power hungry components -- an LTE modem, a more intense, higher resolution screen, and the aforementioned higher-core GPU.

No benchmarks on the LTE performance (surely network dependent) or battery life have been published yet, to our knowledge. It remains to be seen whether the larger battery delivers better or worse results than Apple's promised 10 hours, in the real world.

AnandTech founder Anand Shimpi, a veteran iPad user considered the larger battery a necessary evil, but complained, "The new iPad isn't as heavy as the original model, but it's clearly heavier than the iPad 2. I don't believe the added weight is a deal breaker, but it is a step backwards."

VI. LTE -- Fast and Dangerous

In addition to the $130 USD "LTE tax" you'll pay Apple to trade up from Wi-Fi, AnandTech reports that data plans will remain relatively pricey and capped at lower limits -- the highest of which is 5 GB. The U.S. plans are available from Verizon Wireless, a joint venture between Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ) and Vodafone Group Plc. (LON:VOD), and AT&T, Inc. (T) -- America's top two wireless carriers in terms of subscribers.

On the plus side AnandTech reports that the new tablet is not SIM-locked. Apple's decision to open up on the SIM side means an easier path to international roaming, as you can just pop in different cards to hop on different subscribed-to networks.

Do the details of the specs of the new iPad matter in the way that people seem to think they do? Do speed tests and comparisons matter much in the real world?

It seems to me that what Apple wanted to do was significantly improve the iPads display, beef up other aspects of the device like the camera, open up access to high speed 4G LTE network speeds and then do two very important things:

- Make sure that the new iPad feels as fast or faster in use than the previous model even though it's doing a whole lot more such as generating significantly greater graphic information.

- Ensure that the new iPad has battery performance that is broadly as good as the previous generation (i.e. as good if not better than anything else out there)

And that's it - that's simply what Apple wanted to achieve.

From the sound of people's hands on experience of the device it seems they have succeeded, nobody says it's slower and nobody says the battery seems to drain quicker. This time next week a couple of million plus people will be testing the new iPad in the real world and we will know for sure if Apple succeeded.

That simple aim, as fast and the same battery life even with the new display, 4G etc, is all Apple has to do. The other tablets aren't breathing down it's neck, Android tablets have, generally, flopped, the Amazon Fire doesn't seem to be eating into Apple's market much if at all and the new lower priced entry model of the cheaper iPad2 will guard that flank, and Windows 8 tablets wont arrive for months yet and won't offer much of strong challenge (if they ever do) until next year.

One final point about the new iPad display. One problem in marketing the display is that it is so much better than current computer displays that one simply can't show marketing material that does it justice. It's like the difference between the screen on the iPhone 3GS and the iPhone 4 which could only be appreciated if you saw the new display in real life. Most people will 'get' what the the new iPad display offers when they actually see or hold one. That's where the Apple retail stores with 100 million plus visitors a year are so important, in the new mobile device world channels are vitally important.

Next year will be interesting. Presumably Apple will push the new iPad down to the entry level pricing tier. I wonder what they planning for the new top of the range model, the one that will compete against the Windows 8 tablets (assuming the Windows tablets actually sell in any number and that's a big if).

Specs only really matter to a tiny minority of the population who are more worried about benchmarks and specs than how the product performs in the real world. This minority just can't get their head around the fact that Apple sells a superior experience, despite the specs and benchmarks. You would think they would have realized by now that efficiency and intelligent design trump throwing hardware at inefficient software.

I mean, I like reading specs as much as the next guy but I've been around gadgetry log enough to know that specs are never the whole story.

I agree with your entire post, except for one little thing.The Subject: "Do arcane spec facts matter?"Yeah- they do, when Apple were the ones claiming them. If they had marketed it as all of the things you said, I for one would be fine with it. Unsubstantiated claims of myriad multiples of improvement over all the competition smack of an IT company run by marketing not engineering.